In supporting his proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has often claimed that failure to liberalize cross-strait economic relations would result in Taiwan being marginalized like North Korea. Following suit, the Mainland Affairs Council has published half-page ads in local newspapers making the same point.
However, no matter how often it is repeated, this analogy is not only wrong, but it is also insulting to the 23 million Taiwanese — and their many supporters abroad — who fought to turn this nation from an authoritarian regime under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) into a democracy. It is also insulting to the 23 million North Koreans who are crushed under the heel of the Kim Jong-il apparatchik.
North Korea is isolated for many more reasons than its national policy of juche, or “self-reliance.” Far more importantly, its isolation is a direct result of its long list of Cold War-style policies, among them: Pyongyang’s starvation of its citizens, the thousands of ballistic missiles it aims at Seoul, belligerent behavior in the Korean Peninsula (including the seizure of the USS Pueblo in 1968), its kidnapping of Japanese nationals, its development of nuclear weapons and proliferation of internationally banned material.
Taiwan hasn’t been isolated by choice; rather, its isolation stems from Beijing’s efforts at undermining Taipei’s international space. Through education abroad and a vast global business network, Taiwanese have demonstrated without doubt that they do not seek a domestic version of North Korea’s failed juche policy.
Furthermore, it shed the characteristics of a “rogue state” alongside North Korea decades ago, when it abandoned its secret nuclear weapons program, stopped harassing Taiwanese dissidents in the US and ended the systematic terrorizing of its citizens — all activities that took place under the KMT.
No one in Taiwan wants the country to be compared to North Korea, not even those who oppose an ECFA.
Ironically, the very president who would prevent Taiwan from turning into another North Korea is heading an administration that is showing increasing signs of roguishness. Chief among them were the executions on Friday night, after a four-and-a-half year moratorium under “troublemaker” former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), of four inmates on death row. Granted, executions are matters of national policy and continue to have strong support among Taiwanese, but Friday night’s development went against international norms and brought the country back to the ranks of a shrinking list of countries that continue to use the death penalty — among them China, the US, Iran, Saudi Arabia and North Korea.
This is also an administration that has grown silent on human rights violations in China at a time when it is intensifying cross-strait exchanges and at all levels, from economic to cultural. Alleged Taiwanese spies are executed by China without so much as an official complaint from Taipei. Beijing cracks down on Tibetans and Uighurs in Xinjiang and again the Ma administration remains mum, ostensibly for the sake of better relations between the two countries. And for two consecutive years under Ma’s rule, press freedom in Taiwan has also declined, as shown in a recent report by Freedom House.
Deepening ties with an international pariah and choosing to remain silent, however self-servingly, when the economic giant crushes dissent and threatens ethnic minorities in its midst does not cast Taiwan in a good light. In fact, it gives the impression that the nation is siding with repression.
If only the Ma administration limited itself to false analogies, we wouldn’t have too much cause for concern. However, when this government’s actions threaten to turn Taiwan into a pariah state, then we should worry.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has created a dilemma that could soon cause him to be hoisted with his own petard, bringing his leadership of China to an end. His threatening rhetoric over the unification of Taiwan with China, in which he has said, “we are willing to draw blood if necessary,” has placed Xi in a corner. Xi is portrayed as a strong world leader, yet he has created a scenario for himself that most likely would have an unfavorable outcome. With the 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) scheduled to convene this month, Xi cannot
The 77th session of the UN General Assembly opened on Sept. 13. More than 10 overseas Taiwanese organizations had submitted a petition to the UN secretary-general, protesting that 23.5 million Taiwanese are excluded from representation. As president of the Taiwan United Nations Alliance, I also submitted a letter to the UN, saying that Taiwanese should have the right to be represented under the name of Taiwan. The government has been asking its allies to support Taiwan’s entry into the UN, but under its official name, the Republic of China (ROC). Doing so would have involved the right to represent China, with
I was privileged to meet with many of Taiwan’s leaders and leading thinkers during a study tour visit in August. One theme I heard several times during that trip was that bad relations between the United States and China benefit Taiwan. At first thought, I empathize with the argument. After all, there is a troubling record of America’s leaders negotiating with Beijing over the heads of Taiwan’s leaders. For example, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt returned Taiwan to China after World War II. President Richard Nixon surprised Taiwan leaders with his 1972 trip to China. President Jimmy Carter unilaterally chose to normalize
Washington’s “one China” policy has not changed and the US does not take a position on Taiwan’s sovereignty issue, a US Department of State spokesperson has said. He said that this has been the principle of US policy toward Taiwan since 1979, and the policy has remained in effect. He also said that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has privately made this clear to Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅). The US’ “one China” policy and China’s “one China” principle recognize China as the “representative of China.” The two diverge on the issue of Taiwan: Beijing asserts sovereignty